Ugh, replying to myself, but I put the wrong link... SmartQ has a lovely product naming convention; they've got a SmartQ 7 and a SmartQ V7, two different products.
If this were anything else but porn (and especially the kind of porn it is), I'd be with you. But, I'm afraid of the right-wing judges on there, and what they'll say about this.
Comcast Guy 1 : Oooh, I see User Joe is running BitTorrent. Comcast Guy 2 : Why, I think you're right. Let's ban his ass. Comcast Guy 1 : Now, wait just a minute, Comcast Guy 2.. We don't know whether it's legal or not. Comcast Guy 2 : Hmm... You may be right about that. Let's ban him anyways, and see if he complains. After all, he might be pirating valuable NBC programming, like the Tonight Show with Jay Leno! And if we don't stop him now, we will cease to be! Comcast Guy 1 : My God... you're right.
Seriously, do you think, in any plane of the multiverse, that Comcast would do the research to find out if the torrent the user was sending was legal, as opposed to block now and ask question later? Especially with them getting into content ownership, as well as being a content deliverer?
Let's take a look at the DMCA, and see how often companies that send DMCA notices really care about doing the research, and how often it backfires on them. Well, it does backfire on them from time to time, but are there actual consequences beyond Slashdot laughing at them?
Way to summarize a few decades' worth of work by hundreds of scientists. If that's your standard of proof, then I assume you wake up every morning and start your computing project with 2 tons of sand, because you just can't trust the hardware and software makers. I see that you're posting, so you must be really smart and hardworking too...
If the GP needed sand, I think we all can see that you have an abundance flowing out of various orifices.
I for one can't wait until this "government school scheduling program"
is applied to my government-run healthcare system to schedule patients.
Yay?
I guess reading the summary is hard, where it's stated they spent $4.1 million on the system. And if you look at the linked website for the company, it looks to be a private company based in Arizona, not anywhere near where the district is.
I wasn't being satirical... The Beard knows all!!!!.... OK, I can't handle that any more. Back to reality.
Personally, I agree with you. The Cult of RMS is just that. If you don't fully drink the Kool Aid, you are outcast and unclean. That closed minded thinking annoys me to no end.
You and your "freedom". When will you realize that RMS can do no wrong? Give up your quaint notions, your "thinking for yourself", and bask in the glory of his beard!
Yeah, but when your question directly revolves around a question of law, it does kind of beg the question that lawyers should be your first stop. Especially when you know enough to know the name of the law (in this case, HIPAA). A quick google search would lead you to www.hipaa.org, and there's a handy-dandy menu on the left with all sorts of stuff to know.
The guy already knows enough to know this is a Bad Idea (tm), so it was more an Ask Slashdot about "Hey, I know this is a Bad Idea (tm), but is there any way I can weasel out of it being a Bad Idea (tm)?"
And as for your penile encrustations... That sounds like another Ask Slashdot question.
Assuming you cover yourself properly from legal liability, do whatever your clients want... Then turn them all into the HIPAA police (I know there aren't HIPAA police... I have no idea who does the enforcement actions; you get the idea) for some sort of reward.
That being said, your writeup sounds like you're a contractor/have your own company. If that's the case, the best you can do (Outside of telling your customers you aren't going to and being fired) is make very clear, in writing, what your opinion is, and get them to sign off, in writing, that they are responsible and/or have another way for handling confidential info, etc.
I'm not sure if that's enough to cover your butt or not. See first sentence about this is slashdot, not legaldot. I would consult with a lawyer, preferably one that is not one of your customers.
This looks more like plain old (physical) sabotage, with the use of the word "cyber" to pander to the slashdot crowd.
If the definition of "cyber attacks" means "doing anything to hamper the internet", hurricanes and tornadoes have been committing cyber attacks against the mid-west for years now. Let's not even talk about typhoons, tsunamis, and other sorts of natural disasters.
I'm going to start the Outlaw Natural Disasters movement... Who's with me?
Qualys' CTO said, 'These slow [corporate] patch cycles are simply not acceptable. They lead directly to these high infection rates.'"
It's also not acceptable that corporate desktops become useless because of an update that MS rolled out that broke mission-critical software.
There's a reason there's an IT vetting process with patches (fool me once, shame on you... fool me twice, three times, every patch tuesday, shame on me). There's also a reason why those processes take a while. If you disagree with IT workers doing their jobs and making sure that an update won't screw up the network/application/productivity/company, take it up with software vendors and MS, not with the people who are trying to make sure their company stays functioning. Or will you be willing to pay for their time in fixing problems if they apply patches that break things?
Don't whine that you bought an unlimited connection for $30/month and you should get to use it without penalty. I do agree connections should never have been sold as unlimited (indeed this addresses that very point) but you're an idiot if you think current networks to the home in the US can deliver that sort of bandwidth at that sort of cost.
Unlimited... But no penalty...
Can you please explain your argument in terms that are not idiotic? I can't seem to follow this one. Maybe it's the fact that I don't have coffee yet.
Seriously, though.. Is it my fault that I was sold a bill of goods ("Unlimited Internet"), and took it to mean what it said on the face, and what *WAS NOT* contradicted by the contract? The contract didn't say "Unlimited actually means 50GB a month"...
From dictionary.com's definition of "unlimited":
1. not limited; unrestricted; unconfined: unlimited trade. 2. boundless; infinite; vast: the unlimited skies. 3. without any qualification or exception; unconditional.
Slashdot Mirror
Ugh, replying to myself, but I put the wrong link... SmartQ has a lovely product naming convention; they've got a SmartQ 7 and a SmartQ V7, two different products.
http://en.smartdevices.com.cn/Products/V7/200912/04-40.html is the V7's spec sheet, which is what I meant to link.
If you're not opposed to Chinese made, check out the SmartQ V7 : http://en.smartdevices.com.cn/Products/SmartQ7/200905/27-3.html.
Also, http://www.mobileread.com/ is a focused e-reader forum.
So, no more sex between a married couple with the lights off in the missionary position for the purpose of procreation?
Correct. To be labeled as not-obscene by the 4chan standard, I think you need to include a tentacle or a donkey or something.
Have you met our Supreme Court recently?
If this were anything else but porn (and especially the kind of porn it is), I'd be with you. But, I'm afraid of the right-wing judges on there, and what they'll say about this.
Let's do a little thought-excercise here.
Comcast Guy 1 : Oooh, I see User Joe is running BitTorrent.
Comcast Guy 2 : Why, I think you're right. Let's ban his ass.
Comcast Guy 1 : Now, wait just a minute, Comcast Guy 2.. We don't know whether it's legal or not.
Comcast Guy 2 : Hmm... You may be right about that. Let's ban him anyways, and see if he complains. After all, he might be pirating valuable NBC programming, like the Tonight Show with Jay Leno! And if we don't stop him now, we will cease to be!
Comcast Guy 1 : My God... you're right.
Seriously, do you think, in any plane of the multiverse, that Comcast would do the research to find out if the torrent the user was sending was legal, as opposed to block now and ask question later? Especially with them getting into content ownership, as well as being a content deliverer?
Let's take a look at the DMCA, and see how often companies that send DMCA notices really care about doing the research, and how often it backfires on them. Well, it does backfire on them from time to time, but are there actual consequences beyond Slashdot laughing at them?
No.
If the GP needed sand, I think we all can see that you have an abundance flowing out of various orifices.
I agree that pirating may/will happen... But, I tend to think that "The Open Source Community" would frown on those shenanigans.
Gonna go out on a limb here and say "Develop apps for Android."
I guess reading the summary is hard, where it's stated they spent $4.1 million on the system. And if you look at the linked website for the company, it looks to be a private company based in Arizona, not anywhere near where the district is.
So... Yay?
It's late here... Is this serious or no?
I wasn't being satirical... The Beard knows all!!!!.... OK, I can't handle that any more. Back to reality.
Personally, I agree with you. The Cult of RMS is just that. If you don't fully drink the Kool Aid, you are outcast and unclean. That closed minded thinking annoys me to no end.
You and your "freedom". When will you realize that RMS can do no wrong? Give up your quaint notions, your "thinking for yourself", and bask in the glory of his beard!
What would be the point if it *didn't* send the info to anyone?
Yeah, but when your question directly revolves around a question of law, it does kind of beg the question that lawyers should be your first stop. Especially when you know enough to know the name of the law (in this case, HIPAA). A quick google search would lead you to www.hipaa.org, and there's a handy-dandy menu on the left with all sorts of stuff to know.
The guy already knows enough to know this is a Bad Idea (tm), so it was more an Ask Slashdot about "Hey, I know this is a Bad Idea (tm), but is there any way I can weasel out of it being a Bad Idea (tm)?"
And as for your penile encrustations... That sounds like another Ask Slashdot question.
I just had another thought on this.
Assuming you cover yourself properly from legal liability, do whatever your clients want... Then turn them all into the HIPAA police (I know there aren't HIPAA police... I have no idea who does the enforcement actions; you get the idea) for some sort of reward.
This is slashdot, not legaldot.
That being said, your writeup sounds like you're a contractor/have your own company. If that's the case, the best you can do (Outside of telling your customers you aren't going to and being fired) is make very clear, in writing, what your opinion is, and get them to sign off, in writing, that they are responsible and/or have another way for handling confidential info, etc.
I'm not sure if that's enough to cover your butt or not. See first sentence about this is slashdot, not legaldot. I would consult with a lawyer, preferably one that is not one of your customers.
Just because you are bad at it doesn't mean that its a completely useless skill
Just because you are good at it doesn't mean that it's not a completely useless skill.
Plus it's translated from Sanskrit so it's hardly readable.
That's a 5000 year old dead language... Couldn't they have tried Latin?
This looks more like plain old (physical) sabotage, with the use of the word "cyber" to pander to the slashdot crowd.
If the definition of "cyber attacks" means "doing anything to hamper the internet", hurricanes and tornadoes have been committing cyber attacks against the mid-west for years now. Let's not even talk about typhoons, tsunamis, and other sorts of natural disasters.
I'm going to start the Outlaw Natural Disasters movement... Who's with me?
If sci fi shows are for nerds... Most nerds have DVRs of some sort if they happen to be out on a Friday night (yeah right).
It doesn't seem like any night is a "bad" night.. Nor, really, a "good" night.
I mean... I know this is microsoft... And I know this is slashdot... But, can you at least read the summary, where it's stated:
It's also not acceptable that corporate desktops become useless because of an update that MS rolled out that broke mission-critical software.
There's a reason there's an IT vetting process with patches (fool me once, shame on you... fool me twice, three times, every patch tuesday, shame on me). There's also a reason why those processes take a while. If you disagree with IT workers doing their jobs and making sure that an update won't screw up the network/application/productivity/company, take it up with software vendors and MS, not with the people who are trying to make sure their company stays functioning. Or will you be willing to pay for their time in fixing problems if they apply patches that break things?
You clearly haven't meant the AntAgonizer.
And no... I'm not joking.
Unlimited... But no penalty...
Can you please explain your argument in terms that are not idiotic? I can't seem to follow this one. Maybe it's the fact that I don't have coffee yet.
Seriously, though.. Is it my fault that I was sold a bill of goods ("Unlimited Internet"), and took it to mean what it said on the face, and what *WAS NOT* contradicted by the contract? The contract didn't say "Unlimited actually means 50GB a month"...
From dictionary.com's definition of "unlimited":
1. not limited; unrestricted; unconfined: unlimited trade.
2. boundless; infinite; vast: the unlimited skies.
3. without any qualification or exception; unconditional.
Seems pretty unambiguous to me.
If there's one thing I've learned from SCO, it's that lawsuits don't need a basis in reality.